Funds for developing countries to combat the effects of climate change
Monday, 21 December 2009
M A Rahman
THE Copenhagen Summit on climate change has produced nothing substantive in nature, after its long sessions of meetings and discussions, beyond a non-building understanding or accord, short of formal nature. The developed and rich countries have "promised" in vague terms some amount of funds but the modalities and nature of the same remain largely inexplicable, leaving much room for cashing doubts over their operational significance for combating global warming.
The experts say that the industrially developed countries are the key actors behind the high growth of global warming. On the other hand, the developing nations are the most vulnerable ones to this green house effect.
So, the demand of the vulnerable countries in the Bella Centre to the developed nations for cooperating with them, in more concrete and meaningful terms, in combating climate change by actual funding is far more than 'begging', as the demands are referred to, by the developed countries.
Experts also say that the expenditure of making a spacecraft can feed the poor Africans for a quite long time. There, people are dying out of hunger. In this context, the huge expenditure on account of astronomical researches by NASA in the name of national security and others, raise question on its aptness.
The amount of money allocated for national security and other 'silly' sectors in the annual budget of the developed nations can feed the whole under-developed world for more than a year.
So, for achieving the real goals of 'climate change' summit, the discriminations and divisions among developed, developing and under-developed countries must end met.
It will be logical for the developed nations not to waste money and, thus, help make our mother earth habitable and save the lives of thousands of millions of people living in the developing countries.
THE Copenhagen Summit on climate change has produced nothing substantive in nature, after its long sessions of meetings and discussions, beyond a non-building understanding or accord, short of formal nature. The developed and rich countries have "promised" in vague terms some amount of funds but the modalities and nature of the same remain largely inexplicable, leaving much room for cashing doubts over their operational significance for combating global warming.
The experts say that the industrially developed countries are the key actors behind the high growth of global warming. On the other hand, the developing nations are the most vulnerable ones to this green house effect.
So, the demand of the vulnerable countries in the Bella Centre to the developed nations for cooperating with them, in more concrete and meaningful terms, in combating climate change by actual funding is far more than 'begging', as the demands are referred to, by the developed countries.
Experts also say that the expenditure of making a spacecraft can feed the poor Africans for a quite long time. There, people are dying out of hunger. In this context, the huge expenditure on account of astronomical researches by NASA in the name of national security and others, raise question on its aptness.
The amount of money allocated for national security and other 'silly' sectors in the annual budget of the developed nations can feed the whole under-developed world for more than a year.
So, for achieving the real goals of 'climate change' summit, the discriminations and divisions among developed, developing and under-developed countries must end met.
It will be logical for the developed nations not to waste money and, thus, help make our mother earth habitable and save the lives of thousands of millions of people living in the developing countries.